We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supply@me Capital Plc | SYME | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.001 | 4.00% | 0.026 | 12:07:39 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.026 | 0.026 | 0.03 | 0.025 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| SOFTWARE & COMPUTER SERVICES |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 20/4/2024 14:22 by city1911 It all depends if/how long it takes SYME to be commercially viable. Any placing in itself isn't great. However if SYME can start getting IMs completed to the extent they need to then it's not the end of the world. Depends on how long people are prepared to wait. Currently it looks like they are well off making this a success if at all. |
Posted at 19/4/2024 13:50 by thanatos abysss funny that , coz everywhere else shows syme is down today#rosetintedglasses #loser #lol Institutional Investments19 Apr '24 - 12:37 - 153046 of 153049 0 0 0 Was looking at syme +9.68% a few mins ago, and MIN -9.68% |
Posted at 14/4/2024 07:30 by nobbygnome To remind SYME investors what PPE said about you around 7 months ago….and now he is one of you. What a weasel he is….‘SYME investors are nutters. They're all self-obsessed, delicate, dainty, insecure little souls and absolute psychopathic f##kwits. Every last one of them!’ |
Posted at 04/4/2024 09:32 by smithie6 Question.Raising money from inventory you have sitting in your warehouse. 1) how solid an asset is that to a lender ? If the lender is not repaid his cash, if he sends a truck to collect the security for the loan (the specific quantity of inventory of type XYZ) if the inventory is not there, the lender is screwed & loses his money, yes ? 2) someone has to physically go to the warehouse & check the inventory exists & that it is in perfect condition? That means cost & delay, no ? 3) What stops a company in problems raising cash by selling it's inventory to 4 different companies like SYME......but then, because it is in problems (let us say it's products are double the price of Asian imports) it goes bust anyway....& there are a queue of creditors, none of whom will get 100% back ? And there are surely creditors with higher status who have to be paid before SYME. 4) and this RNS text ...is it a massive red flag ? "As a result TAG is currently pursuing legal options to allow for the required loan repayments to be made by them and for the SYME shares that were transferred as loan security for the HWCP Loan and the SLS Loan to be transferred back to TAG." 5) 0.04p/share & billions of shares....& the main director is perhaps in Italy Is that more red flags ? Italy is close to Greece, home of the famous scam played on UK investors by "Globo" PLC. 6) Is Italy highly respected for - it's financial sector ? - the honourability of its politicians (recall Berlusconi, sacking of the city rulers of Rome if I recall correctly) - the stability of it's Governments - it's ability to keep the mafia out of society & life - the honesty of it's policemen ....quite a forest of red flags from where I am standing. |
Posted at 30/3/2024 18:34 by extrader Hi guys,There are some basic misunderstandings about RTOP. (1) It's not a new company : the Prospectus , if anyone bothers to read it, includes its last 3 years (loss-making) results as an Italian company, incorporated and doing business (unsuccessfully) since 2017. (2) There's been no 'floatation' merely a listing introduction to the London market. (3) No shares were sold on listing in the UK : TAG decided the share capital should be divided into 60m units and parcelled out 35% to (cough) unconnected accounts - on unspecified terms [Ed.: could even be for free] - in order to satisfy UK listing 'liquidity/marketabi .."The Company is not party to the arrangements to be entered into between TAG or RegTech Italy and such independent third parties.... The Company will not receive any proceeds from the disposal or sale (as applicable) of such 20,997,000 Ordinary Shares.." (4) As with the SYME RTO, the valuation at listing of 100p a share is a complete fabrication and has/had no connection with reality aka RTOP's historic (consistently loss-making)results or its future prospects. (5) As soon as PI's bought shares in RTOP that 'legitimised' its fabricated value aka 'worth what someone is willing to pay for it'. (6)TAG was THEN able to use the 'currency' it had thereby created to settle some debts/intra-company payments. (7) It's an open question whether RTOP in fact owns the Orbit Open platform, on which it 'depends heavily' for its growth : I posted this on the SYME board about 3 1/2 years ago : .."(1) RTOP appear in the Gartner survey as ' Vendors' of Orbit 4BC (2) These people hxxps://www.glgroup. .."Founded in 2000 and acquired in 2011 by GL Group S.p.A., Orbit Italy is a BC consulting firm IT service provider, and software development leader. Our team of highly skilled and certified experts has extensive experience in business continuity, disaster recovery, and risk assessment process management..." and here hxxps://www.glgroup. that Orbit-4BC is one of THEIR product lines; and, scrolling down on that page that the MIR3 Business Continuity Management Service (that RTOP shows on its website) is "distributed by Orbit Italy, the only Italian company who can offer pre and post-sale technical support.." RTOP and SYME may differ in the detail, but they're both 'variations on a theme', AFAICS. GLA |
Posted at 25/3/2024 13:45 by paul planet earth1 NobbygnomeThat's the point is it not MIN have been in exactly the same situation as SYME. I fail to see the difference. SYME may or may not succeed but its ironic your supporting MIN which has a long track record of regular share dilutions, misleading its investors and delivering nowt! Yet you claim SYME is at fault for the very same reasons why MIN is where it is, a bit ironic isn't it! |
Posted at 24/3/2024 20:01 by paul planet earth1 Its actually quite a simple relationship..3 lenders lent cash to TAG who on lent to SYME..SYME shares were exchanged as security for the loan there are no restraints on the lenders selling said shares into the market which was a strong incentive to lend to a small high risk fintech in the first place!Now assuming WL IM progresses with Banoco BPM, SYME, may have access to a bank funded working capital credit line. It borrows under this to fund the £400k a month working capital. The intercompany loans are simply written off as is the TAG loans with each lender...highly unlikely the third party lender will either still have the shares having sold at a gain or will wish to buy back open market. This all aligns to earlier RNS eluding to changing the funding structure to bank lending. No short squeeze here, it's a simple arrangement being unwinding which Nobbygnome doesn't get! Nobby why are you paying premium to run a BB on a share you hold no investment in? |
Posted at 24/3/2024 16:17 by extrader Guess what AZ is a director of both connected companies.That's the whole point! How is SYME not pursuing any rights/claims it has against TAG in SYME's (shareholder) interests ? Especially(1) if the consequence is a contributory factor in subsequent insolvency/liquidati That's a pretty serious conflict of interest, wouldn't you say? And re the three lenders, the fact that they may have made huge gains is irrelevant : (a) if TAG repays the loans and the lenders don't return the related shares, then TAG has a case against them. Why would it not / has it not pursued?* * Of course, if TAG insisted on the 'cash alternative' option embedded in the agreements (unusual feature), it would get back twice as much value as if it received shares today. Now there's a thought... (b) if TAG doesn't/hasn't repaid the loans, then TAG is in default and the lenders are entitled to keep the shares (or don't have to account for them , if they've sold them). Capisce? |
Posted at 24/3/2024 12:42 by extrader Pls explain how AZ = TAG can agree to write off monies it owes to SYME (where he's CEO), monies on which SYME depends to avoid insolvency.Or how AZ as CEO of SYME would not be in breach of his fiduciary duties to SYME shareholders if he agreed to this... TIA |
Posted at 24/3/2024 10:39 by extrader Hi ppe1In your 4292 you talk of SYME writing off the loans. The loans are to 1AF2 >'newTAG', a 24% shareholder in SYME, 'beneficially owned' by SYME's CEO... HTH |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
